About your Search

20130421
20130421
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12
. >> good evening. i'm the director of the yale law library and i'm here to welcome you to the library booktalk sister i want to thank the founders society for cosponsoring tonight's talk. tonight's program features logan beirne who is the author of a new book on america's first chief executive entitled "blood of tyrants: george washington and the forging of the presidency." this is very much a yale law school block. it began as a paper while logan was a law school student. the paper was written -- after graduation from law school in 2008 and working two years in a law firm, logan returned to yale law school in 2010 as a scholar and began turning the paper into the book that we feature tonight. appropriate laid we have the professor with those to comment on the book. professor is a highly distinguished member of the yale law school factoid. is the author of numerous books, monographs and articles, and several of his books have been featured in previous book club series sponsored by our library. according to a recently published study by my colleague, fred sugar, professor eskridge is
. ratified by the senate or the law of the land. and it sounds to me like one of the punchlines of your account, even though washington powers did grow, he did have a republican understanding, which required him to be very attentive to the commitments that were made by the nation. in the 1770s, we were not in position to make international commitments, but we did it with didn't have a lot of statutes on the book, but we have resolutions. would you not say when it washingtons experiences the commander-in-chief has a constitutional obligation to take seriously the commitment the nation has made in conventions like the geneva convention. .. >> i think it's important for the commander-in-chief to be looking at commitments that we make. >> others? more questions? speeches? opinions about canada? [laughter] >> [inaudible]. >> the former dean wants to make a speech about her youth. [laughter] >> i spent many summers canoeing in canada and singing every morning oh, candidate, which is beautiful. for that reason i made a point in junior high school of studying the history of canada, and why i ha
. neither was infanticide. in fact, the roman law mandated it of especially deformed infants. infants would be left out, taken up into slavery or just die. so you see the moral transformation of the west in accordance with christianity. whether you're christian or not, you can say, yeah, i see this happening. certain things now are held to be bad that before, people that were indifferent about or thought was good. and then beginning -- well, actually, i argue beginning in the early 1500s but certainly by the 1900s and the 20th century, the sort of arc of christianity starts to descend s and as we have increasing secularization of the west, that coip sides with the rise of liberalism because they really are, in many ways if not all ways, the same thing. and you see the same moral issues, you see a clash between the christian moral world view and liberalism. and liberalism generally takes the side of the kind of things that were affirmed in the roman empire. so just as an historian of ethics, i can see that. not even have to take sides, you still see the same ethical transformation historical
'm actually concerned about that. [inaudible] just something broke yesterday. john kerry's son-in-law, which didn't come out in the vetting process, his son-in-law is an iranian. and iranian americans with very close world is in iran. and that is, it's a breakdown of the vetting process. and so i will ask you all, are you concerned about this? >> i would have to know more about the iranians. most iranian americans of course our strong opponents of every regime i don't know about this person. >> [inaudible] >> this could be a problem, to come in terms of pressure and blackmail. i would be concerned about that, you know. i would say if the state department is now aware of that fact, they may be able to take steps to protect him in some way or put him in some of the portfolio. but i don't know about the situation. >> since we are losing some media coverage, i just want to reiterate that there's a book called "persecuted: the global assault on christians." three of the three authors are here on this panel. we are grateful for your time. also, new website, persecutionreport.org. please don't neg
issued a proclamation which declared in effect marshall law for the county of princes and, required all of this history wear red ribbons to show their loyalty for the mother company. the first house of worship actually was the old courthouse building, but that was acquired in the 1820s, and it served for almost 100 years a. across the street from us is a church which was organized in 1843, portion of the old sanctuary survived a 1940s fire, and, therefore, it is the oldest house of worship here in this area. the city of virginia beach as we noted consist of 310 square miles until relatively recently, very rural, in the beginning of the wicked are only 19,000 people in all of the modern city of 440,000. and so the historic buildings that we have going back to hundred, 250, 300 years are really very scattered. today, virginia beach is known to many people because of the resort and the oceanfront. that was impossible really in the 1880s when the rail line was constructed from norfolk to the oceanfront. there are several buildings at the oceanfront which reflect the early years of the virgi
in cleveland working for a law firm, and this next call comes from bobby in ohio. >> caller: i've got a question for you in regards to the comment you made about rg 3:and the article about him being called an uncle tom. why would you state that person saying that would be republican? wouldn't democrats actually sometimes have feelings like that? i'm a republican, and i don't feel that way towards rg iii, so i'm just curious why you would say that. >> guest: you either misunderstood what i said, or i said it badly. what i said was the espn guy criticized rg iii because he thought he was republican. he said there's a rumor he's republican, i don't know about that. he's got a white fiancee, i don't know about that. he called him a cornball brother because he suspected that rg iii was a republican, but he had a white fiancee. that is why this caster called him a cornball brother which i think is a racist thing. so i'm sorry if i misexplained it. >> host: go ahead, bobby, you're still on the line. >> caller: i appreciate that. i agree the same way you do then. i think it's totally a racist
by will you -- must include the contributions of the transgendered? by law. you will have to have pages on transgendered contributions. people who were crossed over sex, or dressed in the other sex. clothing. isn't that absurd? isn't that totalitarian? i thought the purpose of the textbook was to tell the truth, not make groups feel good. but as i point out in the book, leftism is overwhelmingly rooted in feelings. >> host: dennis prager is the author. "still the best hope" is the name of his recent best seller. louis from florida, you're on the air. you're talking with dennis prager. >> caller: i'd like to ask mr. prayinger and his ilk what he just said about truth, why should people believe the bible when that's the biggest novel ever written? who believes the earth is 5,000 years old? how can you follow a book that tells you the world is 5,000 years old and hisclass commentary about the christian schools and the seminary, how does he say something like that and he wants to be honest? i know this man is a right winger, and he wouldn't fifth credit to anybody, but my main question is,
both would have to sign before to become law. they would have to agree on executive order, sipri court nominees, decisions as commander-in-chief of the military. each would have their own vice president for a small personal staff but all other appointments the executive branch or the judiciary would be a single joint appointee. with that they could make decisions so much more quickly. you sort of have a democrat nominating a democratic person or republican for republican. you would have a bipartisan nominee and there wouldn't be a confirmation in the position will be filled much more quick way. in all likelihood they would divide up primary responsibilities. one might direct health care and the other education. one might focus on our relations with european countries and the other with asian countries but when it would come time to make decisions they would have to agree. all decisions would have to be shared decisions. joint decision would make it more representative decision-making. instead of having a republican president champing the platform of the republican party or a democratic
no to a trajectory but what do you think? should we have limits to how much we spend? the health care reform law has proposed the independent advisory board to be set up with 15 minutes and they would recommend ways to curb spending based on realignment and closure commission remember we had to close military bases is very hard for elected officials to make those decisions to close the military base for their own constituencies of a seated that responsibility to experts in congress had to agree or disagree. palace the model used for the independent payment advisory board. cannot change medicare eligibility raise premiums are cut benefits and if congress doesn't like any recommendations it doesn't have to agree with any of them but it would have to come up to find equivalent savings of its own. it was repealed in the u.s. house of representatives claims that the doctor patient relationship is that what the opposition was about? the interest of patients for not being able to seek continuing revenue? proposed in "medicare meltdown" the real reason is the desire to move -- removed any impediments for wh
an ngo if it runs afoul of laws on foreign money. i think the main thing would be what does the organization itself want? the democracy and human rights activist in egypt was company on this a year or two back and said, ask of the organization. it's probably the best judge of its own risks and what it needs. so that's all i can suggest on that. >> i'm with the investigative project on terrorism to our organization tracks domestic islamists that are filled with the rugged such as the council -- islamic society of north america and we've been able to see if there's been a close correlation between these groups and lobbying the obama administration. it come out and support the brotherhood in egypt and elsewhere in the middle east. do you think that they are having an impact on how the administration deals with indigenous christians in the muslim world? >> quick canvass. we would have no idea on, you know, what are the dynamics, just observe the phenomenon, the current administration, with the bush administration as far as are doing with iraq did not raise this issue, did not fo
of law, but this is the last one i read and then move it to q&a. it is simply live with the book but i hope to get out of it. the purpose of this book is twofold. to familiarize the american public and decision-makers, specifically the senior war college and to encourage discussion on how to improve the education of their important missions. the latter sense of the idea that there's room for improvement. cocos must be clear. whether war college goals are clear and whether articulated goals are supported by practices and processes that these institutions as part of the discussion. admiral james stafford is provided to think or take a nation of busy of for college education goes up to 2011 national war college convocation by describing this situation when he arrived at national in 1991. quote, i knew it i was good at and what i do well, driving a destroyer or crusader, leading a boarding party with a surrogate mother, landed in an air defense. beating sailors on the deck leadership, but fails to sense what i did not know or understand well. global politics and grand strategy, importance
human rationality. people do all kinds of really stupid things. we enact stupid laws sometimes that a lot of people agree on more because certain interest groups influence others. look at the gun legislation. yeah it's for the failure to enact it is driven by the economic interest of a certain small bunch of businesses but is that really why a huge number of other individuals who believe that's a good thing to do or wildly misinterpret the second amendment because they feel it within themselves. with regard to slavery and you jumped off from that, one of the things that became and has become clear to me the more i have delved into the world of the slave owner it's self and indeed the pre-emancipation north where it wasn't really all that different, is that a lot of people really liked slavery. they liked it. yes it was profitable but it wasn't always all that profitable and a motivator particularly in the 19th century was much of the south it was up into the respectable middle class to own a slave. it gave you a status in the stature that you might not have otherwise so why did
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12